Interesting story; I'm bit underwhelmed by the Missoni influence here. I'm going to have to go back and look at the helicopter flight paths again to see how this one apparently escaped restriction. I'll bring this render into the thread: And this one of the podium: For the rest, go...

The significance is, at first blush, mostly tied to the issue of the Tripartite extension. This statement may require probing. (yes, that is their public position) The City is under no obligation to renew or extend the agreement beyond 2033; that said, I wouldn't presume that it would be...

I doubt it. Minister of Housing is there for the Feds, not the Minister of Transport. I think the train announcement would likely see Chrystia in town too, if not the PM. But I could be wrong.

I have work to do, so I haven't watched all the deputations.........but I did manage a couple (Ports Toronto and Nieuport, to see how Committee members handled them) . I will say, I found it incredibly obvious who has been lobbied heavily by those same interested parties.......

For clarity for everyone, should the above be adopted by Council, this effectively kills this project. *** That said, Cllr. Matlow made public that there have been active discussions with major philanthropists, and others, about funding, and he expressed some hope, that something firm by way...

Ports Toronto via the Airport Improvement Fee and Borrowing, the latter, subject to sufficient borrowing authority conferred by the Federal Government. * Option one is less costly, and there may be sufficient reserves (within Ports Toronto) to cover all or a substantial portion of it.

FWIW; for interested parties this item is up at Executive, right now:

That's key. Which is different, as you note, from broadly supporting airport expansion. I would also clarify that there are different versions of RESA compliance and its important to understand both the short-term and longer term consequences of them all, which may extend well beyond the obvious.

Thanks!

Is that what our Mayor is in favour of.............? LOL There are far more issues at play that whether some or all of the current airport lands might one day be park space............. Its a good deal more complex.

Were you one of the people who invested in Leonard? LOL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_v._Pepsico,_Inc.

This one is apparently headed to TEYCC on October 24th. (notice has gone out to the community). There are no apparent changes in the Docs.

A little TY to @robmausser for his giving me a small statistical milestone here at UT

This above C of A application heads to the October 16th meeting for adjudication. A Letter of Objection is on file. From said letter:

Some minor tweaks for this one headed to C of A on October 16th. Should be a non-issue. But just to make sure the stats are correct, I will duly flag @Paclo...

Not sure what the change was...........but new plans were submitted here Sept 5th, 2024. This is set for C of A' s Oct 16th /24 meeting. @Paclo

I don't know, but because of the very small footprint of the remaining land out to the corner (less than 1000ft2.) I don't think there is a viable proposal for that chunk of land whether the adjacent wall were blank or not.

As part of refining the design for this Park, the City has a survey out, which is open until October 7th (next Monday). https://cotsurvey.chkmkt.com/?e=414011&d=l&h=9F1BC40363FF8BF&l=en From the above:

American text books? American Spell check by default. Shopping Centre ****** Even with 'Canadian English' for spell check.........on a UT post, when I type Shopping Centre.......see what happens: That red underline indicating an error, and suggesting Shopping Center instead. You have...

Good Question! No Stop Work Orders. They seem to have all their permits, though most of them were revised in Oct/Nov '23. That said, this is not a large building......an if those revised permits were acted on by Jan '24.........things should be further advanced by now....